Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance (DHS)

[Imperius]

The only thing that will suck about this ride is I won’t be able to ride it for a year or more due to no FP available. I don’t wait in two hour lines. Hopefully can get lucky with refreshing.

 

[rastuso]

Sooooo...

If we take the carrier up to the Star Destroyer from Batuu as the preshow... how do we get back to the planet surface?

Perhaps that is part of the main ride somehow? Like our little trackless ride vehicle being driven by a droid enters an escape pod and we fly our way back down? (Or even better crash land our way down in the burning wreckage of the star destroyer we destroy from the inside during our escape.) Using a full motion base and simulator screen tunnel section like Kong 360, so has more motion capability than the trackless RV can handle.

Would make for one heck of a finale.

This way we unload on the planet without having to board the carrier again for the way down.

TWO rides with "exciting space fighting simulations" for the finale?

The only thing that will suck about this ride is I won’t be able to ride it for a year or more due to no FP available. I don’t wait in two hour lines. Hopefully can get lucky with refreshing.

Two hour lines, oh you mean in 2022?

 

[Imperius]

Two hour lines, oh you mean in 2022?

Yeah I didn’t say 4 hours since that’s just stupid and no one should do that. I won’t even wait in a “slow” time line.

 

[Alicia]

TWO rides with "exciting space fighting simulations" for the finale?

Not space fighting... space crashing!

If this ride has mostly physical sets and AAs for most of the ride, as is rumored, I wouldn’t mind a simulated escape/crash landing to finish it off. Sounds better to me than getting back into another carrier for post-show back to Batuu.

 

[12th Man]

Yeah I imagine the “escape” in Battle Escape will play a large part in the ride.

 

[Scott W.]

Sooooo...

If we take the carrier up to the Star Destroyer from Batuu as the preshow... how do we get back to the planet surface?

Exit through the gift shop probably.

 

[Orlandofan12]

Ratatouille has some basic effects as you enter and leave some rooms, but definitely not moving points of convergence, because there are multiple points of convergence, since there are multiple ride vehicles in front of the same screen.

NOt sure about shanghai, as I haven't ridden it, but I understand it as having huge screens that are more like simulator screens, so again, not really moving points of convergence.

If you weren't in a RV in either ride the screen would look super wonky. Ratatouille takes the average anticipated perspective to change the perspective, therefore it's a little more subtle, but still definitely a parallax effect. Shanghai Pirates is perhaps the best use of parallax of any ride in the world right now.

Universal has become supremely lazy as of late, while Disney has been making strides in innovation all over the place. WDI's R&D budget has never been higher, while UC's is a speck by comparison. A lot of talented people have left UC in the last few years because it's become so dogmatic and the culture is not very hospitable to creativity or good storytelling. It's one of the big reasons Scott Trowbridge left, whom I would say was one of, if not the greatest talent at UC.

crash land

Ding,ding, ding!

The cylindrical structure that is the ride's exit is the wreckage of our escape pod. The structure will be hidden from view elsewhere in the land so not to spoil the ride's ending or ruin the thematic integrity of the ride/land. Again an example of the lengths they've gone to.

Exit through the gift shop probably.

Surprisingly not. In fact, the closest gift shop to the ride exit is a good distance away.

Where were you guys when everyone was proclaiming FoP the best ride in Orlando if not ever and I said it was basically BTTF 2.0?

That's largely due to Rohde's perspective on theme parks. Rohde has zero interest in innovation for innovation's sake. However, imo, Rohde brought something very unique to the table that flipped the typical attraction storyline on its head: no dialogue, no "something goes wrong" turning point, etc. He also pretty much perfected the simulator experience. There's something to be said for that. As a simulator, FoP is as good as it gets. And clearly, the general public loves it which is really the true measure of an attraction:do people enjoy it? A five-star review on Tripadvisor indicates the answer is yes. I don't think just because a ride is a simulator it should be ineligible for any crown. As to the comparison to BttF, other than being a simulator the similarities end there. If one was to demean an attraction simply for re-using a ride system, then one might say RSR or Journey to the Center of the Earth are merely Test Track 2.0. I don't think that comparison does the former two any justice.

Also, I will note Trowbridge is NOT Rohde.

 

[leavesonthelawn]

That's largely due to Rohde's perspective on theme parks. Rohde has zero interest in innovation for innovation's sake. However, imo, Rohde brought something very unique to the table that flipped the typical attraction storyline on its head: no dialogue, no "something goes wrong" turning point, etc. He also pretty much perfected the simulator experience. There's something to be said for that. As a simulator, FoP is as good as it gets. And clearly, the general public loves it which is really the true measure of an attraction:do people enjoy it? A five-star review on Tripadvisor indicates the answer is yes. I don't think just because a ride is a simulator it should be ineligible for any crown. As to the comparison to BttF, other than being a simulator the similarities end there. If one was to demean an attraction simply for re-using a ride system, then one might say RSR or Journey to the Center of the Earth are merely Test Track 2.0. I don't think that comparison does the former two any justice.

Also, I will note Trowbridge is NOT Rohde.

Agree with the majority of this, its not always about innovation. I have as much fun on Cars Quatre Roues Rallye as I do on many more 'technical' rides!
(Plus BTTF/Simpsons always seems to hurt my head/neck area while FoP does nothing of the sort)

For me FoP is all about the total experience (with added personal reasons) and I think walking through Galaxys Edge and the build up to the rides will give me the same feelings.

 

[Joe]

Sooooo...

If we take the carrier up to the Star Destroyer from Batuu as the preshow... how do we get back to the planet surface?

Perhaps that is part of the main ride somehow? Like our little trackless ride vehicle being driven by a droid enters an escape pod and we fly our way back down? (Or even better crash land our way down in the burning wreckage of the star destroyer we destroy from the inside during our escape.) Using a full motion base and simulator screen tunnel section like Kong 360, so has more motion capability than the trackless RV can handle.

Would make for one heck of a finale.

This way we unload on the planet without having to board the carrier again for the way down.

Post show or they Gringotts it and no one notices.

Universal has become supremely lazy as of late, while Disney has been making strides in innovation all over the place. WDI's R&D budget has never been higher, while UC's is a speck by comparison. A lot of talented people have left UC in the last few years because it's become so dogmatic and the culture is not very hospitable to creativity or good storytelling. It's one of the big reasons Scott Trowbridge left, whom I would say was one of, if not the greatest talent at UC.

WDI isn’t UC a and vice versa. Any comparisons miss the point entirely. Universal contracts and signs agreements, Disney pays and buys things outright which leads to near billion dollar lands like Pandora.

UC is like Marvel, they have a dictated house style with not much room for individuality.

 

[Alicia]

Ding,ding, ding!

The cylindrical structure that is the ride's exit is the wreckage of our escape pod. The structure will be hidden from view elsewhere in the land so not to spoil the ride's ending or ruin the thematic integrity of the ride/land. Again an example of the lengths they've gone to.

Yay, I guessed the ending!

Figured it would be something different than just another post show flight back to the planet.

 

[Joe]

So one thing I want to comment on is “story”. Story is not required for a good ride but plot and emotion are needed. There needs to be an escalation and release in action in addition to an emotional buy in. This can be done in several ways (“and then everything went wrong” and a build up of music are two tropes) but when they are missing they are noticeable. This is where Flight of Passage sits: it doesn’t invest guests in the ride, doesn’t offer a reason to care, and doesn’t draw any emotions besides the last few seconds of music and imagery at the end. Compare this to the plotted, visual build up, and musical build of River Journey which is a better constructed experience.

The SWGE rides can offer plot like HM or BTMR while also using the iconic film scores of the movies to invest people in their journeys.

 

[Alicia]

So one thing I want to comment on is “story”. Story is not required for a good ride but plot and emotion are needed. There needs to be an escalation and release in action in addition to an emotional buy in. This can be done in several ways (“and then everything went wrong” and a build up of music are two tropes) but when they are missing they are noticeable. This is where Flight of Passage sits: it doesn’t invest guests in the ride, doesn’t offer a reason to care, and doesn’t draw any emotions besides the last few seconds of music and imagery at the end. Compare this to the plotted, visual build up, and musical build of River Journey which is a better constructed experience.

The SWGE rides can offer plot like HM or BTMR while also using the iconic film scores of the movies to invest people in their journeys.

Not to mention a wise cracking droid to help us escape! If there’s one thing Star Wars rides need, it’s a droid pilot that offers some levity. Luckily, it looks like Rise will be following in that tradition.

 

[Legacy]

Universal has become supremely lazy as of late, while Disney has been making strides in innovation all over the place. WDI's R&D budget has never been higher, while UC's is a speck by comparison. A lot of talented people have left UC in the last few years because it's become so dogmatic and the culture is not very hospitable to creativity or good storytelling. It's one of the big reasons Scott Trowbridge left, whom I would say was one of, if not the greatest talent at UC.

I want to key in on the bolded part, because it's a critical point that you kinda talk around (I think, unintentionally).

The lesser budget is a big (maybe the predominate) reason for the differences between the two entities. Disney can, essentially, go as over the top as they want, while Universal HAS to be more measured. That limitation can lead to creative stagnation but, externally, it also forces things to feel more redundant. The two cheapest types of rides are simulators/screen-based and coasters. You also end up with "two-for-one" deals, which result in identical ride systems in neighboring parks. Essentially, everything you're haranguing Universal on is because a limited budget they don't have control over. (They have to go through Comcast, who still seems hesitant to finance stuff that isn't Potter.) And, yes, a massive budget will draw competitive designers.

But to say Universal has become "supremely lazy" misses the forest for the trees. They're developing a whole new resort (Disney isn't). They're building the Potter coaster, which you can in no way call lazy. And they're doing it with their comparable "speck" of a budget. Meanwhile, Disney is cloning a roller coaster and a screen ride (again, the two cheapest types of rides), while cheering a screen ride (FoP) as their most recent crowning achievement. RotR will be fun, I'm sure, but my guess is it'll be as incremental an improvement over Spider-Man as FoP was over BttF.

So, basically, it's really an apples and oranges comparison where both parks are doing the exact same thing. In all reality, the most creative thing Disney is putting together right now is Runaway Railroad. Everything else is safe.

 

[shiekra38]

So one thing I want to comment on is “story”. Story is not required for a good ride but plot and emotion are needed. There needs to be an escalation and release in action in addition to an emotional buy in. This can be done in several ways (“and then everything went wrong” and a build up of music are two tropes) but when they are missing they are noticeable. This is where Flight of Passage sits: it doesn’t invest guests in the ride, doesn’t offer a reason to care, and doesn’t draw any emotions besides the last few seconds of music and imagery at the end. Compare this to the plotted, visual build up, and musical build of River Journey which is a better constructed experience.

The SWGE rides can offer plot like HM or BTMR while also using the iconic film scores of the movies to invest people in their journeys.

I would also argue that a "story" doesn't necessarily fit every attraction (see Haunted Mansion and Pirates)....We clearly know that something makes the mansion weird, and something happened to set the Carribean Town on fire....We are left to wonder what happened

Star Wars, however, may be more grounded in a linear story...I think that's where rides like Spiderman exceed...And where FJ has a big weakness

 

[Legacy]

I would also argue that a "story" doesn't necessarily fit every attraction (see Haunted Mansion and Pirates)....We clearly know that something makes the mansion weird, and something happened to set the Carribean Town on fire....We are left to wonder what happened

O:

What makes the mansion “weird” is that it’s haunted. It’s filled with death. People died there. That’s why you walk through a graveyard and one of the first things you see is a dead body. That’s the story.

The “something” that sets the Caribbean town on fire is the Pirates of the Caribbean setting fire to the Caribbean town under siege by pirates. The story is that the town is being attacked by pirates (now to find Sparrow).

 

[OLSinFLA]

Sooooo...

If we take the carrier up to the Star Destroyer from Batuu as the preshow... how do we get back to the planet surface?

Perhaps that is part of the main ride somehow? Like our little trackless ride vehicle being driven by a droid enters an escape pod and we fly our way back down? (Or even better crash land our way down in the burning wreckage of the star destroyer we destroy from the inside during our escape.) Using a full motion base and simulator screen tunnel section like Kong 360, so has more motion capability than the trackless RV can handle.

Would make for one heck of a finale.

This way we unload on the planet without having to board the carrier again for the way down.

Well, how do we get all the way back up in Gringotts? LOL. I imagine it will be papered over since everyone will be so excited they won't think about it until later

 

[rastuso]

If you weren't in a RV in either ride the screen would look super wonky. Ratatouille takes the average anticipated perspective to change the perspective, therefore it's a little more subtle, but still definitely a parallax effect. Shanghai Pirates is perhaps the best use of parallax of any ride in the world right now.

Universal has become supremely lazy as of late, while Disney has been making strides in innovation all over the place. WDI's R&D budget has never been higher, while UC's is a speck by comparison. A lot of talented people have left UC in the last few years because it's become so dogmatic and the culture is not very hospitable to creativity or good storytelling. It's one of the big reasons Scott Trowbridge left, whom I would say was one of, if not the greatest talent at UC.

Ding,ding, ding!

The cylindrical structure that is the ride's exit is the wreckage of our escape pod. The structure will be hidden from view elsewhere in the land so not to spoil the ride's ending or ruin the thematic integrity of the ride/land. Again an example of the lengths they've gone to.


Surprisingly not. In fact, the closest gift shop to the ride exit is a good distance away.


That's largely due to Rohde's perspective on theme parks. Rohde has zero interest in innovation for innovation's sake. However, imo, Rohde brought something very unique to the table that flipped the typical attraction storyline on its head: no dialogue, no "something goes wrong" turning point, etc. He also pretty much perfected the simulator experience. There's something to be said for that. As a simulator, FoP is as good as it gets. And clearly, the general public loves it which is really the true measure of an attraction:do people enjoy it? A five-star review on Tripadvisor indicates the answer is yes. I don't think just because a ride is a simulator it should be ineligible for any crown. As to the comparison to BttF, other than being a simulator the similarities end there. If one was to demean an attraction simply for re-using a ride system, then one might say RSR or Journey to the Center of the Earth are merely Test Track 2.0. I don't think that comparison does the former two any justice.

Also, I will note Trowbridge is NOT Rohde.

Rhode can hype like no one else. He can build safe rides for the masses. He can also overhype a ride. But he can't fix a massively hyped Yeti.

Of course, both Disney and Universal use outside technologies for most of the rides. There is a midway Mania ride system ride in Germany. There are some Soarin ride clones, there will likely be a FoP clone elsewhere some day too. There are some much lesser versions of Spiderman out there.

I foresee RotR to be a greatest hits type ride, using tech from a number of recent rides. Hopefully it melds together into the top tier ride Disney hasn't built in a long time. But I'll be surprised if it brings anything new to the table.

FoP is still Soarin with the screen closer, and a different ride vehicle. Not a game changer in any way shape or form.

 

[Orlandofan12]

WDI isn’t UC a and vice versa. Any comparisons miss the point entirely. Universal contracts and signs agreements, Disney pays and buys things outright which leads to near billion dollar lands like Pandora.

UC is like Marvel, they have a dictated house style with not much room for individuality.

Oh I definitely agree there. The cultures are completely different. You are spot on with the the lack of individuality at UC. It is increasingly frustrating for many at the place. Disney does buy some things outright, but a lot of work is still bid out. The primary difference in the bid process is that Disney provides a mountain of detail to describe what they want, and it better match their description exactly when it's done. UC is much more vague in what they want, thus it enables contractors to have some leeway in quality, and of course UC goes with the cheapest bid. While this is a flaw for UC, there are plenty of flaws in the WDI model too which goes without saying.

This is where Flight of Passage sits: it doesn’t invest guests in the ride, doesn’t offer a reason to care, and doesn’t draw any emotions besides the last few seconds of music and imagery at the end. Compare this to the plotted, visual build up, and musical build of River Journey which is a better constructed experience.

The SWGE rides can offer plot like HM or BTMR while also using the iconic film scores of the movies to invest people in their journeys.

Ah, we disagree here. I think story is absolutely important. While plot can add to an attraction, in many ways it detracts. When there's a strict following to a plot there's often a misunderstanding of the theme park medium. Movies are for plots. When you have 2 hours to tell a story, you have plenty of time for a layered progression. Trying to cram that in a medium designed to be less than 10 minutes can work when the plot is straight and to the point (Spiderman, Indiana Jones, Shanghai Pirates, etc come to mind), but when you have minutes of straight exposition (F&F or Gringotts) it just doesn't work, and feels disjointed in my opinion.

I want to key in on the bolded part, because it's a critical point that you kinda talk around (I think, unintentionally).

The lesser budget is a big (maybe the predominate) reason for the differences between the two entities. Disney can, essentially, go as over the top as they want, while Universal HAS to be more measured. That limitation can lead to creative stagnation but, externally, it also forces things to feel more redundant. The two cheapest types of rides are simulators/screen-based and coasters. You also end up with "two-for-one" deals, which result in identical ride systems in neighboring parks. Essentially, everything you're haranguing Universal on is because a limited budget they don't have control over. (They have to go through Comcast, who still seems hesitant to finance stuff that isn't Potter.) And, yes, a massive budget will draw competitive designers.

But to say Universal has become "supremely lazy" misses the forest for the trees. They're developing a whole new resort (Disney isn't). They're building the Potter coaster, which you can in no way call lazy. And they're doing it with their comparable "speck" of a budget. Meanwhile, Disney is cloning a roller coaster and a screen ride (again, the two cheapest types of rides), while cheering a screen ride (FoP) as their most recent crowning achievement. RotR will be fun, I'm sure, but my guess is it'll be as incremental an improvement over Spider-Man as FoP was over BttF.

So, basically, it's really an apples and oranges comparison where both parks are doing the exact same thing. In all reality, the most creative thing Disney is putting together right now is Runaway Railroad. Everything else is safe.

Undoubtedly, budgets are a massive factor. Culture is as well, but in some ways budget dictates culture, so that can be considered null sometimes. Universal has become lazy in terms of quality. The one attraction per year mandate has stretched UC resources extremely thin, and it's showing. I would much rather have to wait 2 years for a quality attraction than get 2 mediocre ones.

I would also point out that Universal wouldn't be building a third gate right now unless it was absolutely necessary. They're also very timid about Disney's projects. Universal management has delayed many projects to wait and see what effect Disney's pipeline has on the market. They were like a dog on a power trip, but at the first sign of a bark back, they're cowering with their tail between their legs.

Well, how do we get all the way back up in Gringotts? LOL. I imagine it will be papered over since everyone will be so excited they won't think about it until later

As I said, the ride will end with a crash landing. The cylindrical structure seen here in the model is the ride exit. It's our crashed escape pod.

 

[Joe]

Oh I definitely agree there. The cultures are completely different. You are spot on with the the lack of individuality at UC. It is increasingly frustrating for many at the place. Disney does buy some things outright, but a lot of work is still bid out. The primary difference in the bid process is that Disney provides a mountain of detail to describe what they want, and it better match their description exactly when it's done. UC is much more vague in what they want, thus it enables contractors to have some leeway in quality, and of course UC goes with the cheapest bid. While this is a flaw for UC, there are plenty of flaws in the WDI model too which goes without saying.


Ah, we disagree here. I think story is absolutely important. While plot can add to an attraction, in many ways it detracts. When there's a strict following to a plot there's often a misunderstanding of the theme park medium. Movies are for plots. When you have 2 hours to tell a story, you have plenty of time for a layered progression. Trying to cram that in a medium designed to be less than 10 minutes can work when the plot is straight and to the point (Spiderman, Indiana Jones, Shanghai Pirates, etc come to mind), but when you have minutes of straight exposition (F&F or Gringotts) it just doesn't work, and feels disjointed in my opinion.

Undoubtedly, budgets are a massive factor. Culture is as well, but in some ways budget dictates culture, so that can be considered null sometimes. Universal has become lazy in terms of quality. The one attraction per year mandate has stretched UC resources extremely thin, and it's showing. I would much rather have to wait 2 years for a quality attraction than get 2 mediocre ones.

I would also point out that Universal wouldn't be building a third gate right now unless it was absolutely necessary. They're also very timid about Disney's projects. Universal management has delayed many projects to wait and see what effect Disney's pipeline has on the market. They were like a dog on a power trip, but at the first sign of a bark back, they're cowering with their tail between their legs.

As I said, the ride will end with a crash landing. The cylindrical structure seen here in the model is the ride exit. It's our crashed escape pod.

Im having a hard time figuring out what you’re saying here because your points contradict each other and doesn’t line up with what I’ve heard or what others have said (UC, 3rd park, being timid, etc)

 

[Orlandofan12]

Im having a hard time figuring out what you’re saying here because it seems contradictory and doesn’t line up with what I’ve heard or what others have said (UC, 3rd park, being timid, etc)

Just as when DAK was built, Universal is worried about cannibalization with the 3rd park. If they had the space, they would much, much rather expand the existing parks. Unfortunately (at least they consider it unfortunate), they have to expand further in order to maintain healthy growth.

D23 2017 caused some alarm bells to go off inside Universal. They're taking a wait and see approach to Disney's pipeline. The thinking is that UOR may lose substantial market share as they are not the market leader. If Disney's projects have an adverse effect on UOR, and the Orlando market shifts heavily in Disney's favor, it will have an impact on future Orlando investment from Universal. I dare say, contrary to what many have said, the third gate budget is not locked down.

Whether it is a positive impact or a negative impact is up to the statisticians and what level of investment they determine will generate the best return on investment.